The liberal media’s relationship with facts is tenuous at best, and the constant misreporting of even innocuous scientific studies explains how millions were duped into believing that X and Y chromosomes aren’t a binary system.

As more and more people begin to reject fundamental scientific facts – like the heterosexual nature of human procreation – it makes those who actually took a science course wonder what the hell is going on. The media’s coverage of a recent paper published in Science Advances academic journal answers that question fairly definitively: studying journalism does not require any knowledge of science, yet journalists constantly report on scientific papers. Naturally, when a well-respected media outlet, particularly those with a science focus, covers an academic paper, the readers assume the coverage is accurate, when there’s often nothing further from the truth. The widespread reporting of this paper claims it “disproved” the “universe is a simulation” theory, which you’re probably already familiar with, thanks to the Matrix. Of course, that claim is patently false.

The paper itself is founded in actual science, and the Abstract clearly specifies the most critical piece of information either omitted or glossed over by most of the reporting, namely that the simulation is impossible using existing computational resources. Slightly less crucial, but still incredibly relevant to the actual takeaway from the paper, is the specific method being tested, which was the “quantum Monte Carlo” method.

Academia is already slipping into obsolescence, as journals continue to publish papers about Quantum Physics written by a gender-studies researcher. The ongoing misrepresentation of science by the liberal media is only making matters worse, and most liberal arts majors aren’t equipped to understand these papers, so their takeaway is whatever the media said it should be.

Ultimately, this paper does not conclude that the “Matrix” theory is impossible, as many outlets have been reporting. It does, however, verify that it’s not possible today, using an Alienware computer and brute-force approximation methods.

Of course, that sort of specificity takes the “oomph” out of the headlines, and social media shares have apparently become more important than legitimate science coverage. Though the current state of academia is beginning to make one question the legitimacy of the journals themselves.

Rest easy, all you aspiring Neos of the world, you might still be able to spot that glitch in the Matrix some day.

Feature Image via MoviePilot

  • Bawk Bawkbagawk

    well, duh. if the people in my simulation started to figure it out, this is exactly what I would do.

  • Lonnie

    Was it the same cat? Are you sure?

  • Jesse James

    Yeahhhhhh, nooo! Uhn uh! NO!

    I do NOT want to ever see the matrix in real life. You do realize that the matrix in the movie was run by machines that were manipulating human beings minds in order to use them like batteries right?

    Careful what you wish for! You just might get it. Because some liberal moron will re-enact the Disney movie were a mouse uses the magician’s science book to push the wrong lever and the machines take over.

    Who am I kidding! They’ll have their future pet voters kill us all long before that happens. I’m sure we can all be ecstatic with the diversity hordes raping our women and children after we’re dead. Or have been raped ourselves before being thrown in mines, or then killed.

    Diversity is our strength. And the precursor to the armed overthrow of human civilization by robot zombies. Also known as far-left liberals. Their love of anal is probably why they want Islam here any ways.

    Whichever one is the most false, zombies or machine uprising, makes no difference to me. SJWs are still stupid!

    • MLMII

      I’ve always mentally replaced the battery scene with M holding a microchip instead because it gives me less headaches. … But then again, I also only aknowledge that a single Matrix movie was ever made as well.

  • tx2stpr

    I heard it was Bush’s fault.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    Meh – the popular press has always “sexed up” and misrepresented science.

    Quantum mechanics, which is to say actually *doing* quantum mechanics as opposed to talking about it, involves doing math on vectors of complex numbers – usually working with functions that operate on vectors of complex numbers. But math is hard, so people would rather spin armchair theories about what it all “means”.

    Anyone talking about QM who can’t at the very least add and multiply complex numbers is full of shit and their opinions on the matter can be safely ignored.

  • Nicolas Fabbroni Leroy

    If life is the matrix…. considering late 2016 and 2017 so far…..

    It’s running on Windows 10 and full of viruses and malwares.

  • Dragonslav

    Either way, does it matter at all – until you are offered a blue and red pill?

    • MLMII

      Or the player get bored of messing with their Sims and deletes us all.

  • lurker

    (1) Scientific American is NOT an _academic_ publication. it’s for educated laymen. (2) i used to subscribe to it until it went more & more political (gun control, global warming, single payer health care) (3) it does have some good articles at times (if they’re not related to politics)

    • PunJabber

      “Scientific American” is neither, of course. Also, it was not mentioned in the article.

      As for science itself, it is rooted in the axiom that there is an objective reality. There’s nothing new about Plato’s Cave, the Evil Demon Hypothesis, or “Christian Science”.